Departmental Websites

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will list (a) the websites operated by his Department and (b) the reports placed on the internet in March 2006, indicating in each case whether paper copies were also made available.

Gareth Thomas: DFID maintains the following websites:
	DFID website (http://www.dfid.gov.uk)
	DFID India (http://www.dfidindia.org/)
	DFID Bangladesh (http://www.dfidbangladesh.org/)
	Good Humanitarian Donorship (http://www.goodhumanitariandonorship.org/)
	Developments Magazine (http://www.developments.org.uk/
	R4D—Research for Development portal (www.research4development.info)—this portal was launched on 31 March and contains material which was published previously so contents have not been included in the following table.
	The reports published on DFID websites for March 2006 were as follows:
	
		
			 Name of report Paper copy also available 
		
		
			 Disaster risk reduction policy Yes 
			 Implementation of the Commission for Africa recommendations and G8 Gleneagles' commitments on poverty—the UK's contribution Yes 
			 DEEP IMPACT: an investigation of the use of information and communication technologies for teacher education in the global south—Education Paper 58 Yes 
			 Partnership Programme Agreement—ActionAid Global Progress Report 2004(1) Yes 
			 Pakistan Decision Report—Poverty Reduction Budget Support (PRBS) No 
			 Nepal Annual Report 2005 Yes 
			 Sending money home: UK to India leaflet Yes 
			 How can microfinance help rebuild livelihoods in Afghanistan? No 
			 Pioneering East African drama reaches 5m No 
			 Bangladeshi communities take ownership of hygiene issues No 
			 Training the trainers No 
			 Q. When is a sardine not a sardine? A. When the European Community says it's not: Peru's use of the Geneva-based Advisory Centre on World Trade Organisation Law to challenge a European Community decision No 
			 Paddle your own canoe: a case study of fishing communities around Lake Chad No 
			 Rebuilding livelihoods and maintaining peace: clay-brick making in Sri Lanka No 
			 How Gambian producers gained better access to markets No 
			 Promoting fairtrade tourism in South Africa No 
			 Supporting greater transparency in Bolivia No 
			 How partnership opens airwaves for Bolivian youth No 
			 Right to Identity: Turning schoolchildren into citizens No 
			 Supporting a safer community in La Paz No 
			 Evaluation of DFID Country Programmes: Country Study Ghana 2000–2005 Yes 
			 Project Completion Reports Synthesis Report 2005: An analysis of projects and programmes in Prism 2000–2005 Yes 
		
	
	(1) This was actually an ActionAid report, we published it on our website to raise awareness
	Where paper copies were not made available and where an inquirer has difficulties accessing material via the internet, our public inquiry point can provide hard copy on request.

Disabled Children

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he is taking to help provide education for disabled children in developing countries; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: All children, including those with disabilities or living in difficult circumstances, should have the opportunity to fulfil their right to access and complete a good quality education.
	Tackling exclusion, including exclusion based on disability within the education system, is part of our work with partner governments. Copies of DFID's policy paper entitled 'Reducing poverty by tackling social exclusion' which sets out our broad based approach to tackling social exclusion across all sectors, have already been deposited in the Libraries of the House. This strategy highlights specific issues of discrimination which explain a large part of the disadvantages faced by children with a disability.
	DFID provides its funding for poverty reduction in support of partner governments' own plans for poverty reduction. In fulfilling our financial commitments to partner governments, including the significant commitment announced on 10 April that DFID will spend some £8.5 billion in support of education in developing countries over the next 10 years, the UK Government have taken a significant step forward in improving the opportunity for inclusive education to become a realistic goal for partner governments. We encourage partner governments to ensure that as wide a range as possible of stakeholders participate in the consultations on national poverty reduction strategies, including groups representing disabled people. Issues of social exclusion and targeted interventions for excluded groups will be addressed in the discussions our Country Offices will have with governments on developing 10 year plans for education.
	DFID's social exclusion strategy also emphasises the importance of the role of civil society in tackling all forms of social exclusion and the importance of DFID's partnerships with organisations involved in advocating for the rights of disadvantaged groups.

Ministerial Cars (Fuel Costs)

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the fuel costs were for ministerial cars used by his Department in each of the last five years.

Gareth Thomas: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Transport (Dr. Ladyman) on 27 April 2006, Official Report, column 1226W.

Sakhalin II Development

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what his policy is on the funding for Shell's proposed Sakhalin II development and the requirements of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development's Environmental policy; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: The UK Government have been following this project very closely through their role as a shareholder and Board member of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). The UK Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD) is also considering the request from Sakhalin Energy Investment Company (SEIC) to provide export credit guarantees.
	The Government are fully aware of the social, environmental, commercial and energy security issues associated with this project. The EBRD, the ECGD and other members of the lender group are also treating these issues very seriously. The lender group's involvement in this project so far has improved its social and environmental standards.
	In December 2005, EBRD Management agreed that all documentation required to commence a public consultation process was "fit for purpose". A 120 day public consultation period ended on 28 April. EBRD Management is now considering all written responses received and additional representations from public consultation meetings.
	Should EBRD Management recommend to its Board that the project should receive EBRD funding, then at that point the UK Government will decide whether to support an EBRD loan. The Government will also consider all the representations it has received and carefully assess all aspects of the project before reaching a final decision.

Biodiversity (Agriculture, Environmental Effects)

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps are being taken by her Department to ensure the sustainability of British agriculture.

Jim Knight: British farming is valued for the contribution it makes to the economy and to the environment, through producing our food, safeguarding and enhancing our landscapes, and increasingly to contribute to tackling the problems of a changing world—such as meeting our energy needs. Through the strategy for sustainable farming and food, the Government have put in place a comprehensive and long-term plan to deliver a profitable and sustainable future for farming in this country.
	Key to successful delivery of the strategy is the partnership between Government and industry, based on a commitment to shared goals. Through this partnership much has already been achieved, including: the delivery of CAP reform which, by breaking the link between subsidy and production, will help bring farmers closer to their markets; the cross compliance element of the single payment scheme through which subsidies are linked to the delivery of environmental and animal welfare standards; the launch of environmental stewardship, for which all farmers are eligible to apply to earn payments for undertaking environmental management of their land; and launch of "Partners for Success" a regulation and charging strategy for the farming sector, through which Government will continue to work with industry to regulate better and smarter.
	An independent delivery group chaired by Sir Don Curry will continue to oversee and drive forward delivery of the strategy over the next three years.

Ammonium Nitrate Fertiliser

Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether the Government plans to introduce restrictions on (a) the commercial sale of and (b) the levels of nitrate in ammonium nitrate fertiliser.

Elliot Morley: The Government have no immediate plans to restrict either the commercial sale of, nor the levels of nitrate in, ammonium nitrate (AN) fertiliser.
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend, the then Minister for Rural Affairs (Alun Michael) of 25 May 2004, Official Report, column 1493W, which outlined the measures taken at the time to control the supply of AN fertilisers. Subsequent to that response, the Government invited the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC) to develop a voluntary fertiliser assurance scheme, to ensure robust safety, security and traceability of all inorganic agricultural and horticultural fertilisers throughout the supply chain up to the farm gate. The resulting Fertiliser Industry Assurance Scheme, (FIAS), was launched on 9 January 2006. Details of the Scheme can be found on the AIC website at www.agindustries.org.uk.
	The voluntary and statutory measures governing the manufacture and supply of AN fertilisers are kept under continuous review and further measures will be taken if necessary.

Beef Exports

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on the threat to bio-diversity if biofuels are produced as a single crop.

Elliot Morley: The Department is in regular contact with the Department of Trade and Industry to discuss a whole range of issues related to bio-energy, including the impacts on biodiversity. Most transport biofuel feedstocks will be grown in rotation as part of a mix of several crops on the farm. Production from a mix of feedstocks and replacing crops for food would have a neutral effect on biodiversity. Any replacement of spring sown break crops with winter oilseed rape would have a negative effect on crop diversity and farmland birds. If arable crops replaced natural-regeneration set-aside, this would reduce habitat diversity. In the longer term, as technology improves, straw and wood could be used for bioethanol production without significantly affecting biodiversity.
	Research suggests that, in comparison with arable crops, energy crops such as short rotation coppice grown for heat and power generation can encourage biodiversity, particularly for birds and insects.

Departmental Websites

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list (a) the websites operated by her Department and (b) the reports placed on the internet in March 2006, indicating in each case whether paper copies were also made available.

Jim Knight: DEFRA directly operates a number of websites, including the main DEFRA website (http://www.defra.gov.uk/) and the Government's sustainable development website (http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/). A number of other websites are operated by or on behalf of the Department, its agencies and non-departmental public bodies, but detailed information is not held centrally for these, and an accurate, comprehensive list could not be obtained without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Several thousand pages of documents on the DEFRA website were updated or published during March 2006. As such it would be difficult to identify those which might be regarded as "reports". Specific information about the availability of paper copies of these documents is not readily available.
	DEFRA ensures that reports are, where appropriate, made available as printed copies as well as online. If a report is published only via the website (and not in printed form), this is based on an assessment of factors such as the audience for the document (general or specialist), the nature of the material and its anticipated lifetime, whether speed of distribution electronically is particularly important, and cost-efficiency issues.

Johnson McNeil

Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether Johnson McNeil is employed by her Department or one of its agencies. [R]

Jim Knight: I refer the hon. Member to the answer give on 18 April 2006, Official Report, column 24W.

Military Medals

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what military medals have been issued by the Government since 8 May 1945 for which eligibility may still be claimed; and (a) on what date and (b) for what they were issued.

Don Touhig: There have been 51 campaign related military medals issued by the British Government since 8 May 1945 that can still be claimed. A detailed list is shown in the following tables.
	
		World war II
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 1939 to 1945 Star 3 September 1939 2 September 1945 
			 Atlantic Star 3 September 1939 8 May 1945 
			 Air Crew Europe Star 3 September 1939 5 June 1944 
			 Africa Star 10 June 1940 12 May 1943 
			 Pacific Star 8 December 1941 2 September 1945 
			 Burma Star 11 December 1941 2 September 1945 
			 Italy Star 11 June 1943 8 May 1945 
			 France and Germany Star 6 June 1944 8 May 1945 
			 Defence Medal 3 September 1939 2 September 1945 
			 War Medal 1939 to 1945 3 September 1939 2 September 1945 
			 India Service Medal 1939 to 1945 3 September 1939 2 September 1945 
		
	
	
		General Service Medal (GSM) 1918 to 1962 awarded since world war II
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 South East Asia 1945–46 3 September 1945 30 November 1946 
			 Bomb and Mine Clearance  1945–1949 3 September 1945 31 December 1949 
			 Minesweeping (Naval GSM) 3 September 1945 30 September 1951 
			 Bomb and Mine Clearance  1945–1956 3 September 1945 10 November 1956 
			 Palestine 1945–1948 27 September 1945 30 June 1948 
			 Malaya 16 June 1948 31 July 1960 
			 Yangste (Naval GSM) 20 April 1949 20 April 1949 
			 HMS Consort (Naval GSM) 20 April 1949 21 April 1949 
			 HMS London (Naval GSM) 21 April 1949 21 April 1949 
			 HMS Black Swan (Naval GSM) 21 April 1949 21 April 1949 
			 HMS Amethyst (Naval GSM) 21 April 1949 21 April 1949 
			 Canal Zone 16 October 1951 19 October 1954 
			 Africa GSM with Clasp Kenya 21 October 1952 17 November 1956 
			 Bomb and Mine Clearance  Mediterranean Clasp 1955–1960 1 January 1955 31 December 1960 
			 Cyprus 1 April 1955 18 April 1959 
			 Near East 31 October 1956 22 December 1956 
			 Arabian Peninsula 1 January 1957 30 June 1960 
			 Brunei 8 December 1962 23 December 1962 
		
	
	
		General Service Medal 1962 awarded
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 Borneo 24 December 1962 11 August 1966 
			 Radfan 25 April 1964 31 July 1964 
			 South Arabia 1 August 1964 30 November 1967 
			 Malay Peninsula 17 August 1964 11 August 1966 
			 South Vietnam 24 December 1962 29 May 1964 
			 Northern Ireland 14 August 1969 Ongoing 
			 Dhofar 1 October 1969 3 September 1976 
			 Lebanon 7 February 1983 9 March 1984 
			 Mine Clearance (Gulf of Suez) 15 August 1984 15 October 1984 
			 Gulf 17 November 1986 28 February 1989 
			 Kuwait 8 March 1991 30 September 1991 
			 Northern Iraq/Southern Turkey 6 April 1991 17 July 1991 
			 Air Operations Iraq RESINATE  South 16 July 1991 18 March 2003 
			 Air Operations Iraq RESINATE  North 16 July 1991 30 April 2003 
		
	
	
		Medals for individual campaigns or operations
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 Korea Medal 2 July 1950 27 July 1953 
			 Rhodesia Medal 1 December 1979 20 March 1980 
			 South Atlantic Medal 2 April 1982 12 July 1982 
			 Gulf Medal 2 August 1990 7 March 1991 
			 Iraq Medal 20 January 2003 Ongoing 
		
	
	
		Operational Service Medal with ribbon from 1 January 2000
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 Sierra Leone 5 May 2000 31 July 2002 
			 Afghanistan (Op Veritas) 11 September 2001 Ongoing 
		
	
	
		Accumulated Campaign Service Medal
		
			 Medal From To 
		
		
			 Accumulated Campaign Service Medal 14 August 1969 Ongoing

Fire Precautions (Sub-Surface Railway Stations)  Regulations

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent discussions his Department has had with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister regarding the Fire Precautions (Sub Surface Railway Stations) Regulations 1989.

Derek Twigg: Officials in the Department have been kept fully informed of the progress being made by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to reform general fire safety legislation.

Government Car Service

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Lewes of 13 March 2006, Official Report, column 1886W, on the Government Car Service, what make and model of car has been made available to each Government Minister; how many hours a day a chauffeur is available to them; what the monthly cost is of this provision; and how much is accounted for by (a) running costs of the vehicle, (b) costs of the chauffeur and (c) all other costs.

Stephen Ladyman: pursuant to the reply, 19 April 2006, Official Report, c. 701–2W
	The total contracted cost of providing ministerial transport in 2005–06 was £5,783,200. All other figures given in my reply are correct.

Intelligent Speed Adaptation

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what research his Department has funded on intelligent speed adaptation technology on roads.

Stephen Ladyman: A research project into external vehicle speed control (the technology now more commonly known as intelligent speed adaptation or ISA) was carried out on behalf of the Department for Transport, local government and the regions between 1997 and 2000. The results are available on the Department for Transport website and copies of the executive summary have been placed in the Library.
	A further project into the longer term effects of intelligent seed adaptation on driver behaviour began in 2001 and is expected to end in December 2006. The reports will be available when the project has been completed.
	An additional project entitled "Intelligent Speed Adaptation Research (National and International)" supports the main ISA project and allows for the provision of expert technical advice on ISA, on an ad hoc basis, as the need arises.
	The Department also took part in "SpeedAlert"—a European project which looked at issues surrounding the implementation of speed advice systems. The consortium's final report has been completed and copies placed in the Library.

Media Monitoring and Training

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much agencies of his Department spent on (a) media monitoring, (b) media training and (c) marketing in each year since 1997; and how much his Department spent on (i) marketing in each year since 2002–03 and (ii) (A) media monitoring and (B) media training in 2005–06.

Derek Twigg: The requested figures are set out as follows. However, records of costs from 1997–98 until 2001–02 are not readily available due to d epartmental and Agency re-organisations. Figures for 2005–06 are provisional outturn figures subject to audit.
	
		DfT Agencies
		
			 £000 (rounded) 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 Media monitoring 151 148 200 174 
			 Media training 31 53 97 16 
			 Marketing 11,096 16,807 14,496 13,740 
		
	
	
		DfT Central
		
			 £000 (rounded) 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 Media monitoring 210 206 205 306 
			 Media training 2 2 9 0 
			 Marketing 17,600 16,400 16,200 20,400 
		
	
	Marketing costs include campaign advertising and wider publicity.
	In each year reported, over 80 per cent. of DfT central's expenditure marketing expenditure was on 'THINK! road safety' campaign.

Noise Limits (Airports)

John Penrose: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he plans (a) to introduce new and (b) to change existing (i) measurements of and (ii) limits on peak aircraft noise (Lmax DBA) for airports.

Derek Twigg: The Government sets departure noise limits at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports which are designated for the purposes of section 78 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. We will consider exercising similar powers at other airports if there is evidence that a major noise problem is not being dealt with adequately through local controls; otherwise, such limits are the responsibility of the airport operator.
	The present noise limits at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted have applied since early 2001 and have been subject to further review. The results were published in the Civil Aviation Authority's Environmental Research and Consultancy Department (ERCD) Report 0207, "Departure Noise Limits and Monitoring Arrangements at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airports", in April 2003. The main findings were summarised in our April 2003 consultation paper on night flying restrictions, together with a broad indication of how we would take them into account. This has been taken forward in the Stage One and Stage Two consultation papers on night flying restrictions published in July 2004 and June 2005 respectively.
	In the Stage Two consultation, we proposed possible changes to the departure noise limit applying in the night shoulder periods (11 pm to 11.30 pm and 6 am to 7 am). We also proposed that two additional noise monitors should be sited at Heathrow. We will announce our conclusions in due course. Copies of all the consultation papers and of ERCD 0207 were placed in the House Library.

Oyster Cards

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to give train operating companies, who are not at the end of a franchise, incentives to incorporate pre-pay Oyster cards.

Derek Twigg: The South Western franchise will require the successful bidder to accept Oyster, including pre-pay, in Zones 1–6 and to retail and enable an ITSO (Integrated Transport Smartcard Organisation) based smartcard throughout the franchise. We have made it clear that we will adopt this approach with each of the London train operating companies upon franchise renewal. This decision on technology has given a firm foundation from which train operators and suppliers can move forward.
	We do not believe that it should be necessary to wait for a full round of franchise renewals before Oyster pre-pay is generally accepted by Train Operator Companies in London. We believe that this clear policy will allow train operators to adopt Oyster pre-pay sooner rather than later and have asked the industry for their further proposals.

Press Offices

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much has been spent by (a) his Department and (b) its agencies on press offices in each year since 1997.

Derek Twigg: Records of costs from 1997–98 until 2001–02 are not readily available due to departmental and Agency re-organisations and the information could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
	Figures for 2005–06 are provisional outturn figures subject to audit.
	(a) The cost of DfT Central's press office (including pay and non-pay costs) for the years 2002–03 to 2005–06 is in the following table.
	
		
			 £ million 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 DfT(C) Pay 0.85 0.70 0.70 0.77 
			 DfT(C) Non-pay 0.81 0.80 0.83 0.76 
		
	
	(b) Press office activities in most agencies are not carried out by staff or units solely dedicated to this purpose. Full records of costs are therefore not readily available for press office functions alone. However, agency press office function pay costs have been estimated for the years 2002–03 to 2005–06 in the following table.
	
		DfT agencies (£ millions)
		
			  
		
		
			 2002–03 0.49 
			 2003–04 0.54 
			 2004–05 0.62 
			 2005–06 0.70

Traditionally Male Careers

Jim Sheridan: To ask the Minister for Women and Equality what discussions she has had with business organisations on encouraging school girls to consider careers in sectors which have until recently been seen as traditionally male.

Meg Munn: I have regular meetings with business organisations and use these opportunities to encourage them to work with their members to ensure that they do what they can to encourage girls to consider careers in non-traditional sectors.
	The recent Women and Work Commission report, "Shaping a Fairer Future", identified the necessity of ensuring that girls and boys are not influenced by stereotypical ideas about occupations when considering their subject and career options. They recommend action to ensure that teacher training emphasises the need to challenge gender stereotypes, guidance to pre-school teachers about how to avoid gender stereotypes, and better careers guidance and work experience programmes which would enable girls to get a true picture of the rewards and challenges associated with different careers.
	The Commission will reconvene in early 2007 to consider the Government's response to their report.

Education (Wirral, West)

Stephen Hesford: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children in Wirral West have received the education maintenance allowance.

Maria Eagle: This is a matter for the Learning and Skills Council, who operate Education Maintenance Allowances for the DfES and hold the information about take-up of the scheme. Mark Haysom, the council's chief executive has written to the hon. Gentleman with the information requested and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.
	Letter from Mark Haysom, dated 25 April 2006
	I am writing in response to your parliamentary question that asked "how many children in Wirral West have received Education Maintenance Allowance?"
	Information on the number of young people who have applied, enrolled and received EMA is available at local education authority (LEA) level, but not at constituency level. By the end of February 2006, 3,294 young people in the Wirral LEA area had received one or more EMA payments in the academic year 2005/06.
	I hope this information is helpful and addresses your question.

Further/Higher Education

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of secondary school pupils went on to further or higher education in (a) Taunton constituency and (b) England in each year since 1997.

Bill Rammell: Figures on participation in further education by young people are not available for parliamentary constituencies, but are available for local authorities—including Somerset, 2004 is the latest available year. The figures are shown in the following table.
	
		Percentage of 16 year olds in full-time education
		
			  Somerset England 
		
		
			 1997 72 70 
			 1998 73 70 
			 1999 73 72 
			 2000 73 71 
			 2001 72 71 
			 2002 75 72 
			 2003 76 72 
			 2004 75 73 
		
	
	The latest available figures on participation in higher education by constituency were published by the Higher Education Funding Council for England in January 2005 in "Young Participation in England", which is available from their website at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_03/ This report shows participation rates for young people who enter higher education aged 18 or 19, disaggregated by constituency, for the years 1997 to 2000. The figures for Taunton, and the comparable figure for England, are shown in the following table. HEFCE have not produced participation figures beyond 2000.
	
		Young participation rate (YPR (A)) in higher education
		
			  1997 1998 1999 2000 
		
		
			 Year cohort aged 18 in Taunton 1,230 1,290 1,270 1,190 
			 Participation rate for Taunton(3)(percentage 36 35 29 35 
			 Participation rate for England (percentage) 29.2 28.8 29.2 29.9 
		
	
	(3) Participation rates for constituencies are reported to the nearest whole number.
	Source:
	Higher Education Funding Council for England.
	The total numbers of entrants from Taunton for each year since 2001/02 are given in the following table:
	
		Entrants to undergraduate courses from Taunton
		
			  2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 
		
		
			 Aged 18–19 480 490 460 495 
			 Aged over 19 540 535 585 610 
			 Total entrants 1,020 1,025 1,050 1,105 
		
	
	Note:
	Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5, so components may not sum to totals
	Source:
	Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA).
	The Department uses the Higher Education Initial Participation Rate (HEIPR) to assess progress on increasing first-time participation of English students aged 18–30 in higher education towards 50 per cent.: the latest provisional figure for 2004/05 is 42 per cent. The HEIPR is not calculated at constituency level.

Special Schools (Funding)

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will set out the funding for (a) special schools and (b) children with special needs for each of the past five years and the forecast allocations for each of the next five years.

Maria Eagle: holding answer 27 April 2006
	Planned expenditure by local authorities in England on the provision of education for children with special educational needs and the funding available for delegation to special schools after provision has been made for retained items is included in the attached table. Forecasted future allocations for special schools or for children with special educational needs are not available.
	
		The Education (Budget Statements) (England) Regulations; Budgeted net expenditure on the provision of education for children with special educational(7)(8) needs since 2001–02; as reported by local authorities(9) as at 24 April 2006.
		
			 Cash terms(9)(£) 
			   Budgeted net expenditure on the provision of education for children with special educational needs(7)(8) Of which: Individual schools budget (ISB) for special schools(10) 
		
		
			 2001–02 2,908,380,000 939,548,000 
			 2002–03 3,038,661,000 1,006,662,000 
			 2003–04 3,466,180,000 1,086,666,000 
			 2004–05 3,774,757,000 1,159,564,000 
			 2005–06 4,120,549,000 1,243,204,000 
		
	
	(7) Includes planned expenditure on the provision for pupils with statements and the provision for non-statemented pupils with SEN, support for inclusion, inter authority recoupment, fees for pupils at independent special schools and abroad, educational psychology service, local authority functions in relation to child protection, therapies and other health related services, parent partnership, guidance and information, the monitoring of SEN provision and inclusion administration, assessment and co-ordination. Also included is the funding delegated to nursery, primary and secondary schools identified as "notional SEN" and the individual schools budget (ISB) for special schools.
	(8) Funding delegated to LA maintained nursery, primary and secondary schools are only indicative of the amount that might be spent by schools on SEN.
	(9) Figures are rounded to the nearest £1,000.
	(10) Within the schools budget, the amount available for delegation to special schools after provision has been made for retained items is known as the Individual Schools Budget (ISB). Consequently the ISB for special schools does not include any expenditure on special schools which is planned to be retained centrally by the local authority. The ISB for special schools will also include some general education costs for pupils with SEN in addition to those costs specifically for SEN.

Benefits

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the take-up rate of council tax benefit was amongst pensioners in (a) 1996–97 and (b) the latest year for which figures are available.

James Plaskitt: The latest available information is in "Income Related Benefits Estimates of Take Up in 2003–04", a copy of which is in the Library.

Benefits

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what improvements he is making in the administration of housing benefit.

James Plaskitt: In 2002, we put in place a comprehensive strategy for reform of housing benefit, with the first priority being to improve administration across the board. We have already made significant progress with the average time taken by local authorities to process new claims having improved by over two weeks.
	We have introduced a number of simplification measures to reduce complexity in the housing benefit rules, and provided investment, to help authorities make improvements in the administration of housing benefit. We are also piloting the new local housing allowance in 18 local authorities and the green paper, "A New Deal For Welfare: Empowering People to Work", sets out our intention to extend the scheme across the private rented sector.

Income Support

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what reports he has received on the restoration of the full rate of income support to young people under 25 years; and if he will make a statement.

James Plaskitt: Since income support was introduced in 1988, a single person aged 18 to 24 has been paid at a lower rate than single people aged 25 and over. It would be a new initiative and not a restoration to pay single customers aged 18 to 24 at the same rate as single customers aged 25 and over.
	I am not aware of any reports that have been produced, that give consideration to payment of the full rate of income support to single young people under the age of 25.

Occupational Pensions

Sandra Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he plans to publish his response to the Parliamentary Commissioner's report on the security of final salary occupational pensions.

Stephen Timms: In the oral statement made by my right hon. Friend, Secretary of State (John Hutton) on 16 March he undertook to publish a full response to the Ombudsman's report, including an explanation of the Government's estimate of the cost of implementing the Ombudsman's proposals.
	We expect to publish that response shortly.

Pension Credit

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost of administering the pension credit was in each of the last seven financial years; and what estimate he has made of the administration costs in 2006–07.

Stephen Timms: Information is only available for the year to March 2005. I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 22 March 2006, Official Report, column 411W.
	The Department does not estimate its future administration costs on the basis of individual benefits and allowances.

Post Office Card Account

Jo Swinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Scotland use a Post Office card account to receive their pension, broken down by (a) local authority and (b) constituency.

James Plaskitt: The following tables show the number of state pension payment accounts being paid into a Post Office card account in Scotland broken down by (a) local authority and (b) constituency.
	(a) State pension accounts broken down by local authority.
	
		
			 Local authority State pension accounts 
		
		
			 Aberdeen City 6,400 
			 Aberdeenshire 9,100 
			 Angus 3,500 
			 Argyll and Bute 3,600 
			 Scottish Borders The 4,400 
			 Clackmannanshire 1,600 
			 West Dunbartonshire 3,500 
			 Dumfries and Galloway 7,200 
			 Dundee City 5,200 
			 East Ayrshire 5,700 
			 East Dunbartonshire 2,500 
			 East Lothian 3,500 
			 East Renfrewshire 2,300 
			 Edinburgh City of 11,500 
			 Falkirk 5,500 
			 Fife 12,800 
			 Glasgow City 25,100 
			 Highland 8,800 
			 Inverclyde 3,600 
			 Midlothian 2,500 
			 Moray 3,600 
			 North Ayrshire 5,900 
			 North Lanarkshire 15,200 
			 Orkney Islands 1,000 
			 Perth and Kinross 4,800 
			 Renfrewshire 7,000 
			 Shetland Islands 700 
			 South Ayrshire 5,100 
			 South Lanarkshire 11,600 
			 Stirling 3,100 
			 West Lothian 4,700 
			 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar 1,700 
		
	
	(b) State pensions accounts broken down by parliamentary constituency.
	
		
			 Parliamentary constituency State pension accounts 
		
		
			 Aberdeen North 3,200 
			 Aberdeen South 2,600 
			 Airdrie and Shotts 4,100 
			 Angus 2,700 
			 Argyll and Bute 3,600 
			 Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock 4,800 
			 Banff and Buchan 4,500 
			 Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk 3,700 
			 Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 2,900 
			 Central Ayrshire 3,700 
			 Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill 4,400 
			 Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East 3,000 
			 Dumfries and Galloway 4,600 
			 Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale 3,900 
			 Dundee East 2,800 
			 Dundee West 3,300 
			 Dunfermline and West Fife 3,000 
			 East Dunbartonshire 1,500 
			 East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow 3,400 
			 East Lothian 3,500 
			 East Renfrewshire 2,300 
			 Edinburgh East 2,700 
			 Edinburgh North and Leith 1,900 
			 Edinburgh South 1,800 
			 Edinburgh South West 2,400 
			 Edinburgh West 2,600 
			 Falkirk 3,700 
			 Glasgow Central 2,900 
			 Glasgow East 4,600 
			 Glasgow North 2,000 
			 Glasgow North East 5,000 
			 Glasgow North West 3,700 
			 Glasgow South 3,000 
			 Glasgow South West 3,900 
			 Glenrothes 3,600 
			 Gordon 2,700 
			 Inverclyde 3,600 
			 Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey 3,100 
			 Kilmarnock and Loudoun 4,000 
			 Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath 3,400 
			 Lanark and Hamilton East 3,300 
			 Linlithgow and East Falkirk 3,700 
			 Livingston 2,800 
			 Midlothian 2,500 
			 Moray 3,600 
			 Motherwell and Wishaw 4,700 
			 Na h-Eileanan an lar 1,700 
			 North Ayrshire and Arran 4,200 
			 North East Fife 2,900 
			 Ochil and South Perthshire 3,300 
			 Orkney and Shetland 1,700 
			 Paisley and Renfrewshire North 3,400 
			 Paisley and Renfrewshire South 3,600 
			 Perth and North Perthshire 3,100 
			 Ross, Skye and Lochaber 2,800 
			 Rutherglen and Hamilton West 4,400 
			 Stirling 3,100 
			 West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine 2,600 
			 West Dunbartonshire 3,500 
		
	
	Notes:
	Figures are based on information available at 18 February 2006 and are rounded to the nearest 100.
	Figures refer to accounts live and in payment on the specified date.

Post Office Card Accounts

Philip Dunne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether employees of the Pensions Service are telephoning pensioners to persuade them to cease using their Post Office card accounts.

James Plaskitt: No, employees of the Pension Service are not telephoning pensioners to dissuade them using their Post office card accounts.

Sure Start

Edward Balls: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many women have received a Sure Start maternity grant in (a) England and (b) the Wakefield district in each of the last two years; and what plans he has to extend provision.

James Plaskitt: The information requested is in the table.
	
		Number of Sure Start maternity grant awards
		
			  Great Britain Wakefield Jobcentre Plus District 
		
		
			 2004–05 235,920 1,510 
			 2005–06 237,510 1,600 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures are for all awards, irrespective of whether the award was made to the mother or her partner.
	2. Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10.
	Source:
	Social Fund Policy, Budget and Management Information System.
	We have no plans to widen eligibility beyond the current qualifying benefits.
	Following the Court of Appeal judgment in the "Francis case" however, we are looking to change the legislation to allow payments to people who have been awarded residence orders in certain specified circumstances.
	For any claims made prior to the legislative change, decision makers and appeal tribunals may consider whether the circumstances around any case are the same as in the Court of Appeal case.

Sure Start to Later Life

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he expects the pilots for A Sure Start to Later Life to be under way.

Stephen Timms: We announced in "Opportunity Age" our intention to pilot a LinkAge Plus service, providing a fully integrated service for older people. The Social Exclusion Unit Report 'A Sure Start to Later Life' also proposed a new approach to delivering services to and for older people, building on the principles of the Sure Start model for children and families, LinkAge Plus will deliver this service.
	This programme will test ways of delivering fully integrated services for older people—from employment, health and benefits to leisure and learning. This will involve working with older people to identify effective models that meet their needs and aspirations and involving them in the design.
	The programme plans to run up to eight pilots in England and a number of local authorities are currently helping us to develop the 'LinkAge Plus' concept further and advise on how it can be delivered practically on the ground.
	Final announcements on the programme will be made shortly, including details of final pilot selection. We anticipate that the first pilot will start in July this year.

Workstep Programme

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many places are available through the Workstep programme; how many people were referred to the programme in the last 12 months; and if he will make a statement on future plans for the programme.

Anne McGuire: The Workstep (including Remploy) programme provides around 30,000 places. In the year ending December 2005, 9,841 individuals were referred to the programme.
	The Welfare Reform Green Paper" A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work" announced the review of specialist employment programmes for disabled people, including Workstep, and the intention to consult on our proposals later in the year.
	Separately on the 16 March, the Government announced a review of Remploy Ltd in the context of the Government's strategy for supporting greater numbers of disabled people into employment.

Company Law Reform Bill

Jonathan Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made on replacing Part 31 of the Company Law Reform Bill.

Alun Michael: holding answer 2 May 2006
	My noble Friend, the Minister for Science and Innovation set out the Government's intentions for replacing Part 31 of the Company Law Reform Bill in another place on 30 March 2006. He announced that, the Government will take specific powers in clearly defined areas, in particular capital maintenance, company charges, and reporting and accounting provisions.

Arson

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the total number of arson attacks was for the 100 (a) primary and (b) secondary schools in Northern Ireland with the (i) highest and (ii) lowest percentage of children receiving free school meals in each of the past 10 years.

Angela Smith: The information on the number of arson attacks in schools refer to those with the highest and lowest percentages of pupils with free school meal entitlement. This was used instead of pupils receiving free school meals, as entitlement is a better measure of need. The information on the number of arson attacks in the past 10 years is not available. The Education and Library Boards have provided the following information for maintained and controlled schools for the years 2002–03 to 2005–06.
	
		
			 Percentage 
			  2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
			  High Low High Low High Low High Low 
		
		
			 Primary 3 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 
			 Post Prim 4 2 5 5 2 0 4 1 
		
	
	The information for voluntary grammar and grant maintained integrated schools in the form requested is not readily available and is being requested. I will write to you with the information as soon as possible.

Planning

Jeffrey M Donaldson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many planning approvals have been received by the Divisional Planning Office in (a) Downpatrick and (b) Craigavon in each of the last five years.

Angela Smith: The total number of planning approvals issued by the Craigavon and Downpatrick Divisional Planning Offices between 2001 and 2005 are as follows:
	
		
			   Number 
			  Craigavon Downpatrick 
		
		
			 2001 4303 3223 
			 2002 4486 3822 
			 2003 4538 3706 
			 2004 4100 4256 
			 2005 4563 3696

Tourism

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much the Northern Ireland Tourist Board spent on promoting Northern Ireland as a tourist destination in the Republic of Ireland in each of the last five years.

Angela Smith: The Northern Ireland Tourist Board has an office in Dublin which includes a tourist information centre (TIC) and also a marketing team.
	The annual spend in the RoI office during the period 2001–02 to 2005–06 varied by year and is detailed in the following table. The total spend figures include the running costs of the premises in Dublin.
	Some of the promotion and advertising figures which may be of specific interest are itemised as follows.
	
		
			  £ 
			  2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 Total RoI spend per year 559,919 465,052 1,052,009 1,050,994 720,597 
			 Specific promotional spend  
			 Public relations 31,000 27,417 35,472 37,167 37,183 
			 Advertising 122,131 139,592 704,499 799,535 465,750 
			 Consumer promotions 104,478 72,491 75,511 48,568 38,065 
			 Trade and media familiarisation trips 31,439 49,209 53,258 23,441 21,557

Gibraltar

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much was given to the Government of Gibraltar for national security in each of the last five years.

Douglas Alexander: The United Kingdom retains overall responsibility for the national security of Gibraltar. Overall Government expenditure on the two main forces responsible for this role in Gibraltar, namely, the Gibraltar Squadron and the Royal Gibraltar Regiment, over the past five years has been as follows:
	
		
			   £ 
			  Gibraltar Squadron Royal Gibraltar Regiment 
		
		
			 2001–02 910,000 4,384,000 
			 2002–03 1,101,000 4,733,000 
			 2003–04 1,117,000 4,798,000 
			 2004–05 1,245,000 5,116,000 
			 2005–06 1,328,000 5,638,000 
		
	
	The totals are £5,701,000 and £24,669,000 respectively over the five year period.

US-India Nuclear Deal

William Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the Government are reviewing its policy towards India's possession of nuclear weapons following the recently concluded US-India nuclear deal; and if he will make a statement.

Jack Straw: The Government's policy on India's possession of nuclear weapons has not changed. We do not and will not support India's nuclear weapons programme. We remain committed to the objective of universalisation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which India can join only as a non-nuclear weapons state. But we recognise that this is a long-term objective. We warmly welcomed the announcement of the US-India Civil Nuclear Co-operation Initiative in July 2005 as we believe that the deal can make a significant contribution to energy security, development, economic and environmental objectives for India and the international community, as well as bringing advantages for non-proliferation.

Census Information

Mike Hancock: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to the evidence of her Department's permanent secretary on 28 February 2006 to the Constitutional Affairs Committee, what assessment she has made of the potential administrative impact on her Department of releasing information collected in the 1911 census.

Harriet Harman: In order to make the 1911 census returns accessible to as many people as possible and to prevent its reading rooms being overwhelmed by demand, The National Archives intends to make the available on the internet for the first working day of 2012. Digitisation of the records will take approximately five years. In this context TNA has considered the administrative impact of making returns available in response to specific requests before the online service is launched.
	In line with Treasury policy, TNA intends to use a commercial supplier to digitise the records. Allowing the public to access records during this process would cause repeated disruptions to the scanning process, and make it highly unlikely that any reputable commercial organisation would wish to embark on this large scale programme.
	As is the case for any paper records nearly 100 years old, the 1911 returns are in fragile condition. Repeated handling by staff and members of the public would cause rapid deterioration in their condition. In some cases the original record could become unreadable and the unique information in the lost forever.
	TNA estimates that a significant number of staff might have to be diverted from other work to deal with requests for census records. This would severely impact on its ability to provide a service to its many other customers.

Tribunals Service

Vincent Cable: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps are being taken to raise public awareness of the Tribunals Service.

Bridget Prentice: In addition to the public launch events attended by stakeholders held on 5 April at five major cities across Great Britain, the following steps are being taken to raise awareness of the new Tribunals Service:
	individual tribunals are continuing to work with their existing stakeholders and user groups to promote awareness of the new Service;
	prominently displayed links to the Tribunals Service website www.tribunals.gov.uk have been and are being established for example from the 'Direct Gov', Department for Constitutional Affairs and HMCS websites www.directgov.gov.uk, www.dca.gov.uk and www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk) respectively; and
	public Tribunals Service signage has been displayed on some buildings and will continue to be as local hearing centres become increasingly shared by the tribunals.

Local Government Finance

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what funds have been allocated by the Government to each Greater London Borough Council in each of the last eight years.

Phil Woolas: The information available is shown in the following table.
	
		Government grant allocated to each greater London borough council from 1998–99 to 2005–06 £000
		
			  1998–99 1999–00 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 
		
		
			 City of London 85,052 86,929 88,806 92,503 101,051 116,301 121,278 125,061 
			 Camden 200,121 208,994 218,845 237,742 248,752 266,756 286,979 330,004 
			 Greenwich 207,230 225,508 246,101 264,300 276,789 317,948 338,057 351,270 
			 Hackney 246,385 258,648 272,945 288,231 338,591 371,425 391,775 408,216 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 148,850 159,107 168,927 180,845 190,898 213,397 223,648 230,169 
			 Islington 201,697 224,987 243,470 257,123 272,635 310,144 313,671 339,010 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 120,870 127,582 136,376 142,022 152,609 175,652 176,988 184,014 
			 Lambeth 266,091 284,441 297,079 315,585 339,190 370,394 387,923 400,164 
			 Lewisham 234,615 249,200 271,900 283,458 293,515 353,362 392,906 375,722 
			 Southwark 252,635 279,265 313,860 326,016 351,218 427,964 457,163 435,418 
			 Tower Hamlets 269,788 289,204 310,219 335,064 359,807 409,164 438,278 470,231 
			 Wandsworth 208,076 218,592 229,475 240,694 248,308 279,577 285,924 294,774 
			 Westminster 205,743 214,927 223,983 234,166 248,985 283,096 288,940 301,905 
			 Barking and Dagenham 136,439 153,355 168,827 181,277 193,347 223,681 223,364 237,538 
			 Barnet 197,653 206,389 222,831 240,316 241,925 268,501 282,047 291,894 
			 Bexley 138,397 150,293 161,768 174,242 183,207 200,136 207,772 217,696 
			 Brent 228,112 237,213 250,397 269,426 276,662 324,396 346,623 351,665 
			 Bromley 158,935 170,679 184,021 198,772 199,956 222,117 231,040 240,993 
			 Croydon 213,961 223,053 243,635 266,718 288,307 321,602 340,776 348,684 
			 Ealing 219,684 231,883 248,310 268,568 277,684 302,347 311,933 330,313 
			 Enfield 202,007 219,856 240,111 264,089 275,061 307,878 323,901 334,760 
			 Haringey 217,479 236,886 270,816 296,350 301,816 336,846 344,869 330,309 
			 Harrow 124,974 131,021 140,587 151,243 160,383 182,826 193,032 197,054 
			 Havering 129,039 137,320 148,095 160,585 166,805 182,496 192,558 200,620 
			 Hillingdon 156,474 173,676 171,976 209,693 214,850 235,171 250,302 275,883 
			 Hounslow 164,042 175,518 185,410 198,506 205,749 224,736 236,326 247,493 
			 Kingston upon Thames 75,483 80,037 86,752 94,245 96,829 109,459 115,155 124,820 
			 Merton 107,148 116,318 123,479 128,796 132,213 147,252 162,299 172,209 
			 Newham 286,302 308,655 335,547 362,671 391,428 447,333 458,173 484,876 
			 Redbridge 167,213 183,073 202,581 219,850 212,881 235,121 250,203 259,094 
			 Richmond upon Thames 75,758 81,937 94,629 100,260 106,081 116,903 118,025 122,849 
			 Sutton 106,006 114,785 124,048 132,822 135,718 154,422 170,483 177,818 
			 Waltham Forest 192,707 210,339 229,063 248,061 263,757 278,861 294,979 295,469 
		
	
	Notes:
	1.Government grant is defined here as the sum of specific grants inside Aggregate External Finance, formula grant (revenue support grant, redistributed business rates and police grant) and Greater London Authority (GLA) grant.
	2.Changes in grants between years may be affected by changing local authority responsibilities.
	3.The information excludes those grant programmes, such as European funding, where authorities are simply one of the recipients of funding paid towards an area.

Neighbourhood Renewal Projects

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how much has been allocated to neighbourhood renewal schemes in (a) Romford, (b) Havering and (c) each London borough in each of the last eight years.

Yvette Cooper: Havering, incorporating Romford, does not qualify for support under the Government's neighbourhood renewal initiative.
	Neighbourhood renewal funding received over the last eight years by the eligible London boroughs is contained in the following table. This shows aggregated figures for the following neighbourhood renewal elements: neighbourhood renewal fund, new deal for communities, neighbourhood management pathfinders, and the single community programme.
	
		Neighbourhood renewal funding by borough £
		
			  1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham — — — 1,001,992 1,476,606 
			 Brent — 10,000 245,300 1,868,212 4,108,686 
			 Camden — — — 2,542,997 3,910,759 
			 Croydon — — — 452,813 651,152 
			 Ealing — — — 628,216 914,794 
			 Enfield — — — 1,120,993 1,654,472 
			 Greenwich — — — 2,375,563 3,741,249 
			 Hackney 1,026,300 2,924,000 — 14,473,832 16,273,373 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham — — 309,500 998,278 4,198,525 
			 Haringey — — 10,000 5,502,601 9,351,955 
			 Islington — 10,000 400,000 4,334,217 7,024,237 
			 Kensington and Chelsea — — — 713,823 1,043,467 
			 Lambeth — 10,000 400,000 2,340,384 4,514,748 
			 Lewisham — 10,000 417,057 2,557,150 8,660,129 
			 Newham — 332,786 1,724,626 13,275,140 18,211,210 
			 Southwark 13,050 653,455 1,153,700 5,790,044 10,513,274 
			 Tower Hamlets — 450,000 35,500 11,292,148 14,919,815 
			 Waltham Forest — — — 1,482,290 2,198,528 
			 Wandsworth — — — 350,000 495,000 
			 Westminster — — — 931,006 1,369,910 
			  1,039,350 4,400,241 4,695,683 74,031,699 115,231,889 
		
	
	
		
			 £ 
			  2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 Total 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 1,956,088 2,050,699 1,918,546 8,403,931 
			 Brent 7,683,942 9,662,942 12,732,117 36,311,199 
			 Camden 5,339,524 6,928,523 8,232,849 26,954,652 
			 Croydon 844,139 824,139 813,563 3,585,806 
			 Ealing 1,199,286 1,199,286 1,166,485 5,108,067 
			 Enfield 2,196,024 2,179,492 2,156,977 9,307,958 
			 Greenwich 5,057,875 6,024,855 7,658,857 24,858,399 
			 Hackney 18,040,555 23,066,793 27,670,121 103,474,974 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 6,259,942 7,865,857 9,467,340 29,099,442 
			 Haringey 12,127,622 14,617,288 18,250,090 59,859,556 
			 Islington 13,301,280 14,435,988 18,734,214 58,239,936 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 1,372,614 1,372,613 1,338,728 5,841,245 
			 Lambeth 9,900,930 11,425,562 11,826,300 40,417,924 
			 Lewisham 6,924,803 7,674,066 8,524,853 34,768,058 
			 Newham 20,070,476 29,884,627 32,888,158 116,387,023 
			 Southwark 12,703,996 15,178,778 17,425,970 63,432,267 
			 Tower Hamlets 17,848,196 20,138,714 24,389,589 89,073,962 
			 Waltham Forest 2,928,585 3,180,165 3,184,942 12,974,510 
			 Wandsworth 630,000 632,663 603,274 2,710,937 
			 Westminster 1,812,366 2,080,367 2,075,721 8,269,370 
			  148,198,243 180,423,417 211,058,694 739,079,216

Alcohol

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average alcohol consumption per person, per visit to a pub or bar, was in (a) Southend-on-Sea, (b) Essex, (c) the Metropolitan police area of London and (d) England in each of the last five years for which information is available.

Caroline Flint: The information requested is not held centrally. However, data are available on the mean alcohol consumption (in units) among adults (aged 16 and over) from 1996 to 2002 for England, for each Government office region (GOR) and strategic health authority (SHA). Information on outlets where alcohol is purchased is also available.
	Table 1 provides the mean alcohol consumption per week, in units for adults (aged 16 and over) for each Government office region, including London GOR, and SHAs (including Essex) from 1996 to 2002 using three-year moving averages. The results are taken from Health Survey for England: Health & lifestyles indicators for Strategic Health Authorities 1994–2002".
	Table 2 shows the percentage of adults (aged 16 and above) who had bought alcohol at the four main types of outlet in the last week: by sex and average weekly alcohol consumption in 2004, Great Britain.
	
		Table 1: Age standardised(23) mean alcohol consumption (units) per week among adults(24), from 1996–2002 by three-year moving average(25) for each Government office region and strategic health authority—England -- Units
		
			  1996–98 1997–99 1998–2000 1999–2001 2000–02 
		
		
			 England 12.0 12.1 12.4 12.4 12.6 
			   
			 North East 14.0 13.6 13.7 13.6 13.8 
			 County Durham and Tees Valley 14.8 14.4 13.9 13.9 13.8 
			 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 13.5 13.0 13.9 13.4 13.8 
			 North West 13.3 13.4 14.1 14.4 14.6 
			 Cheshire and Merseyside 12.4 12.5 13.0 13.7 14.8 
			 Cumbria and Lancashire 13.4 13.7 13.9 13.7 13.4 
			 Greater Manchester 14.1 14.1 15.4 15.8 15.5 
			   
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 13.4 14.3 14.8 14.4 14.1 
			 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire 12.5 14.0 15.3 14.7 14.5 
			 South Yorkshire 13.7 13.9 13.7 13.1 13.3 
			 West Yorkshire 14.2 14.9 14.9 14.7 14.1 
			   
			 East Midlands 11.3 11.9 12.1 12.3 12.0 
			 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland 10.7 11.5 11.7 12.1 12.1 
			 Trent 11.6 12.1 12.4 12.5 12.0 
			   
			 West Midlands 11.8 11.2 11.2 11.5 12.1 
			 Birmingham and the Black Country 12.2 11.7 11.3 11.6 11.5 
			 West Midlands South 11.5 10.6 11.0 11.7 13.7 
			 Shropshire and Staffordshire 11.6 11.1 11.1 11.4 11.3 
			   
			 East of England 10.8 10.8 11.2 11.4 11.9 
			 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 11.5 11.9 12.2 12.5 12.4 
			 Essex 10.2 9.7 10.9 11.4 12.4 
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire 10.7 10.8 10.6 10.5 11.0 
			   
			 London 10.4 10.1 10.4 10.4 10.8 
			 North Central London 10.0 9.7 9.9 10.3 10.9 
			 North East London 8.9 8.7 7.8 7.6 8.0 
			 North West London 9.9 9.8 10.7 10.7 12.0 
			 South East London 11.1 10.8 11.8 12.2 12.0 
			 South West London 12.3 12.0 12.0 12.3 11.6 
			   
			 South East 12.1 12.1 12.0 12.1 12.4 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight 12.0 12.2 11.5 10.9 10.9 
			 Kent and Medway 11.9 11.8 11.2 11.4 11.1 
			 Surrey and Sussex 12.4 12.3 12.3 13.0 13.0 
			 Thames Valley 12.0 11.8 12.3 12.4 13.3 
			   
			 South West 11.7 12.0 12.4 11.8 11.6 
			 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire 11.7 12.6 13.2 12.2 11.8 
			 Dorset and Somerset 12.3 12.1 11.4 10.7 11.4 
			 South West Peninsula 11.1 11.5 12.1 11.9 11.5 
		
	
	(23)Data have been age- standardised to take into account differences in age distributions between the SHAs, using the direct standardisation method.
	(24)Adults aged 16 and over.
	(25)To reduce random variation resulting from small sample sizes in each individual year from 1996 to 2002, the method of moving averages was used, where three years of data are combined together.
	Source:
	Health Survey for England: Health and lifestyle indicators for Strategic Health Authorities 1994–2002. Department of Health
	
		Table 2: Percentage of adults(26)who had bought alcohol at the four main types of outlet in the last week: by sex and average weekly alcohol consumption, 2004, Great Britain Percentage
		
			 Weekly alcohol consumption Licensed bar Supermarket Restaurant Off-licence Base (=100 per cent.) 
		
		
			 Men  
			 Non-drinker 1 3 0 1 187 
			 Less than 1 unit 4 6 5 2 179 
			 1–10 units 31 22 17 3 539 
			 11–21 units 53 39 24 8 321 
			 22 units and over 71 41 28 20 356 
			 All men 38 26 18 8 1,582 
			   
			 Women  
			 Non-drinker 1 3 1 0 295 
			 Less than 1 unit 5 6 6 1 403 
			 1–10 units 23 28 18 2 718 
			 11–21 units 39 40 28 6 278 
			 22 units and over 50 48 29 12 256 
			 All women 22 24 16 4 1,950 
		
	
	(26)Adults aged 16 and over.
	Source:
	Drinking: Adults' Behaviour and Knowledge in 2004. Office for National Statistics

Alcohol

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the average alcohol consumption per person, per visit to a pub or bar, in each country in the European Union in each of the last five years for which information is available.

Caroline Flint: The information requested is not held centrally. However, data is available on adult per capita alcohol consumption. The table provides the average adult (aged 15 and over) per capita pure alcohol consumption (in litres) for the last five years available for each of the European Union countries.
	
		Recorded per capita alcohol consumption in European Union countries, 1997 to 2001 Litres
		
			 Country 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 
		
		
			 Austria 13.03 12.76 12.79 12.92 12.58 
			 Belgium 11.19 10.07 10.24 10.21 10.06 
			 Cyprus 6.4 6.58 6.57 6.61 6.67 
			 Czech Republic 16.47 16.37 16.48 16.33 16.21 
			 Denmark 12.51 11.98 11.92 11.98 11.93 
			 Estonia 8.14 8.6 8.02 8.98 9.85 
			 Finland 9.66 9.76 9.98 10.03 10.43 
			 France 14.18 13.97 13.77 13.41 13.54 
			 Germany 13.5 13.23 13.23 12.99 12.89 
			 Greece 9.96 9.45 9.92 9.43 9.3 
			 Hungary 12.45 12.63 11.96 11.94 11.92 
			 Ireland 12.83 13.15 13.79 14.21 14.45 
			 Italy 9.82 9.55 9.36 9.32 9.14 
			 Latvia 8.88 8.91 9.57 9.43 9.31 
			 Lithuania 11.65 10.83 11.26 12.21 12.32 
			 Luxembourg 16.79 18.92 18.36 18.56 17.54 
			 Malta 6.37 6.6 6.72 6.95 6.74 
			 Netherlands 9.96 9.88 9.91 9.84 9.74 
			 Poland 8.5 8.48 8.61 8.54 8.68 
			 Portugal 13.5 13.29 12.96 12.8 12.49 
			 Slovakia 13.07 12.33 12.62 12.44 12.41 
			 Slovenia 11.14 8.26 7.87 11.6 6.55 
			 Spain 12 11.88 11.82 11.92 12.25 
			 Sweden 7.28 6.98 7.07 6.97 6.86 
			 United Kingdom 10.23 9.92 10.25 10.23 10.39 
		
	
	n/a=Data not available.
	Source:
	World Health Organization statistical information system

Care Homes

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what percentage of elderly and mentally infirm people cared for in care homes in (a) Bristol North primary care trust and (b) Bristol South and West primary care trust have their fees paid for by (i) the NHS or (ii) local authority; and what percentage have their personal care costs paid for by themselves, a relative or another third party;
	(2)  what percentage of the fees charged by care homes in (a) Bristol North primary care trust and (b) Bristol South and West primary care trust is paid for by the NHS or local authority.

Caroline Flint: The information is not held centrally in the form requested. However, table 1 shows expenditure on residential and nursing care placements made by Bristol City unitary authority in 2004–05 for the various adult client groups, including older people. This shows gross expenditure, income received from sales, fees and charges and the resulting net expenditure.
	Table 2 shows the number of residents supported by the council as at 31 March 2005, some of whom will have been placed in care homes outside Bristol.
	Information on the percentages of the various ways costs are paid is not collected. According to the 2005 market survey by the independent analysts, Laing and Buisson, approximately 67 per cent. of the cost of residential care in the United Kingdom is funded by social services, or by the national health service to cover nursing care. It is estimated that approximately 100,000, or around 25 per cent., of residents nationally are privately or self funded.
	
		1. Bristol city council—expenditure: 2004–05 £000
		
			  Gross expenditure Sales, fees and charges Net expenditure 
		
		
			 Older people
			 Nursing care placements 13,948 3,831 10,117 
			 Residential care placements 26,970 6,746 20,224 
			 
			 Adults aged 18–64 with physical disabilities 
			 Nursing care placements 913 352 561 
			 Residential care placements 692 223 469 
			 
			 Adults aged 18–64 with learning disabilities 
			 Nursing care placements 1,074 210 864 
			 Residential care placements 13,105 1,940 11,165 
			 
			 Adults aged 18–64 with mental health needs 
			 Nursing care placements 1,367 456 911 
			 Residential care placements 2,289 900 1,389 
		
	
	Source:
	Form PSS EX1
	
		2. Bristol city council—numbers of supported residents at 31 March 2005
		
			  Number of residents 
		
		
			 Older people  
			 Nursing care placements 710 
			 Residential care placements 1,075 
			   
			 Adults aged 18–64 with physical disabilities  
			 Nursing care placements 45 
			 Residential care placements 35 
			   
			 Adults aged 18–64 with learning disabilities  
			 Nursing care placements 15 
			 Residential care placements 285 
			   
			 Adults aged 18–64 with mental health needs  
			 Nursing care placements 50 
			 Residential care placements 85 
		
	
	Note:
	Data rounded to the nearest 5.
	Source:
	SRI return.